Citi Trends
aka milobased
We see the fake new pan africanists but watch out for liberal bougie negros using the self-identifying nature of ADOS as a way to argue against reparations
If you wondered why it took us so long to get to this point, you can thank negros like this. If you're wondering why the hell older black "leaders" are worried about everyone else and not their own people, it's probably because they felt like this.
Against Reparations Article from 2001. Basically arguing against and smearing Randall Robinson's The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks book.
Although Randall had a pan African and america separating view(which most of us probably did until we became more aware) this shuffler used the argument of us being Americans to downplay every need for reparations.
Randall was calling for compensation for Africa and the Caribbean, but he was still asking for specific redress for black americans.
Even as the writer of this article tries to instill Black American pride, he still represents a big problem for ADOS and gives credence the non-ados arguments. This idea that America is fine and tried to help us but we're just lazy and not ALL of us are broke. And then attributing all inclusive policies as "reparations" and that everyone else was able to take advantage of them but we just squandered them.
"how do we know who's black?"
"yall want a check?"
"they dont want us to have reparations"
"that aint gon fix us. we just gonna fukk it up"
Los Angeles Times - Page unavailable in your region
Seriously, how do you stand on this idea that black americans need to identify with America but argue against redress for specific past wrongs and systemic inequality and hold "rising tide" policies as reparations?
Dude just seems to be an all around biscuit eating fukknikka though. All he seems to do is downtalk racism.
He's starting to talk about it again
No Consensus on Need or Possible Results of Reparations - NYTimes.com
o look the "im not against reparations BUT..." stance
https://player.fm/series/on-point-1...020-presidential-candidates-address-the-issue
He talks about how old the reparations conversation is and that the notion was "defeated". He sounds giddy about it, as if all that shyt he talked about as "reparations" helped nothing and we are now approaching being a permanent underclass.
But he's right, this is an old conversation and nikkas like him are why it hasn't gotten anywhere. Non-ADOS blacks against us are a problem, but we also have to get ados like this out of the paint.
If you wondered why it took us so long to get to this point, you can thank negros like this. If you're wondering why the hell older black "leaders" are worried about everyone else and not their own people, it's probably because they felt like this.
Against Reparations Article from 2001. Basically arguing against and smearing Randall Robinson's The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks book.
Although Randall had a pan African and america separating view(which most of us probably did until we became more aware) this shuffler used the argument of us being Americans to downplay every need for reparations.
Randall was calling for compensation for Africa and the Caribbean, but he was still asking for specific redress for black americans.
Even as the writer of this article tries to instill Black American pride, he still represents a big problem for ADOS and gives credence the non-ados arguments. This idea that America is fine and tried to help us but we're just lazy and not ALL of us are broke. And then attributing all inclusive policies as "reparations" and that everyone else was able to take advantage of them but we just squandered them.
See any familiar arguments there? Seriously, all throughout this and his other articles are the same shyt you see today?Which brings us to the money. There are many obvious retorts to the notion of reparations as a practical matter. They include: that many whites in America today arrived after Emancipation; that many whites owned no slaves; that racial mixture would render the very question of who qualifies as a “black” person tricky at best and arbitrary at worst. I feel uncomfortable with the idea of taking money meant for someone I never knew. I feel “black American,” but I do not feel African, and I certainly do not feel that I am just a few steps past being a white person’s property. My connection to my ancestors six generations back, about whom I know nothing, feels more academic than spiritual; and I would feel the same way if my ancestors were wealthy white barons. So I for one could not take the money.
"how do we know who's black?"
"yall want a check?"
"they dont want us to have reparations"
"that aint gon fix us. we just gonna fukk it up"
It is now plain that this policy was not successful in pulling significant numbers of blacks out of poverty. But still America has not given up on the effort: today welfare programs are being recast as temporary stopgaps, with welfare mothers being trained for work. The governor whose version of this program was the most successful is now the head of the Department of Health and Human Services. Time will tell how successful this revision of welfare will be, but the signs are good as I write, and the advocates of reparations have yet to propose any more realistic solution. The funds and the efforts devoted to welfare-to-work, then, represent a concrete acknowledgment of the effects of “structural” poverty. A society with no commitment to addressing the injustices of the past would restrict welfare payments to the temporarily unfortunate, 1930s-style. It would have no welfare-to-work programs aimed at poor blacks.
Yikes/ Welfare and affirmative action.And there is also the policy of affirmative action--a reparative policy if ever there was one, designed to address the injustices of the past. Chrisman and Allen snap that “so-called `racial preferences’ come not from benevolence but from lawsuits by blacks against white businesses, government agencies, and municipalities, which practice discrimination.” This is nonsense. Lyndon Johnson was a white man the last time I checked, and it was he who entered into the history books the famous remark that “you do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line in a race and then say, `you are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.” Affirmative action was initiated as a call to recruit and to hire and to admit qualified blacks. It quickly transmogrified into quota systems, with lesser-qualified blacks often given positions and slots over better-qualified whites--but then we cannot help but suspect that many reparations advocates would laud these preferments as their just deserts.
Los Angeles Times - Page unavailable in your region
Seriously, how do you stand on this idea that black americans need to identify with America but argue against redress for specific past wrongs and systemic inequality and hold "rising tide" policies as reparations?
Dude just seems to be an all around biscuit eating fukknikka though. All he seems to do is downtalk racism.
He's starting to talk about it again
No Consensus on Need or Possible Results of Reparations - NYTimes.com
o look the "im not against reparations BUT..." stance
https://player.fm/series/on-point-1...020-presidential-candidates-address-the-issue
He talks about how old the reparations conversation is and that the notion was "defeated". He sounds giddy about it, as if all that shyt he talked about as "reparations" helped nothing and we are now approaching being a permanent underclass.
But he's right, this is an old conversation and nikkas like him are why it hasn't gotten anywhere. Non-ADOS blacks against us are a problem, but we also have to get ados like this out of the paint.